Posted by
Don White on Tuesday, October 21, 2008 12:00:00 AM
Lower Gas And Oil Prices
Means Oil State Instability
By Don White
In
this time of financial meltdown, it is important to remember that job
creation has a direct relationship to oil prices, as well as to capital
availability. Now that the price of oil has
dropped below $70 when it was almost $150 just three months ago, there
is reason for Americans to again be optimistic. It takes oil prices
like we have today to sustain many industries, two of which are the
airline and auto industries. But it also applies to farming and
virtually everything made in factories fueled by fosil fuel. And, don't forget, 40 percent of our fuel consumption in America is taken up in homes and businesses. Job creation is directly related to the price of a gallon of gasoline in the US.
The price of oil is at $74.25 a barrel, its closing price Monday in New York, It was at $147 as recently as three months ago.
Oil
prices also affect what oil producing nations can afford to spend.
Russia, China, Venezuela, and Iran have stepped up their spending, and
job creation, based on faulty assumptions that oil may always stay at
or around $147 per barrel. We are not saying now that the prices have
dropped that any of the countries is facing immediate economic disaster
or will abandon long-held political goals. And the price of oil, still
double what was considered high just a few years ago, could always
shoot back up.
Still,
Russia, Iran and Venezuela have all based their spending on oil prices
they thought were conservative but are now close to the market level.
Significant further drops could tip the three countries into deficit
spending or at least force them to choose among priorities. A worldwide
recession, which many economists say is likely, would worsen matters,
dampening energy demand and holding down prices.
It
is not clear whether the new pressures could create opportunities for
the United States to ease tensions, or whether the three countries’
leaders will rely more on angry words even if they cannot afford
provocative actions. Mr. Chávez has continued his overtures to Russia.
He, Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin of Russia and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran may now see the United States, hobbled by financial crisis, as even more vulnerable.
Daniel Yergin, chairman of Cambridge Energy Research Associates, a
consulting firm in Cambridge, Mass., said oil states were facing
something of a reckoning. Originally, he said, they saw the economic
crisis as a problem mainly for the United States — but then oil prices
went into free fall.
“Now, the
producers are experiencing a reverse oil shock,” Mr. Yergin said. “As
revenue went up, government spending went up and expectations of a
continuing windfall led to greater and greater ambitions. Now they are
finding how integrated they are into this globalized world.”
Chávez
was almost euphoric last month when he announced that Venezuela would
engage in naval exercises with the Russian Navy in the Caribbean. He
could see some semblance of Venezuela's long-hoped for hegemony over
the US. “Go ahead and squeal, Yanquis,” he said. “Russia’s naval fleet
is welcome here.”
The
moment, made possible in part by a flood of petrodollars used to buy
Russian weaponry, must have been sweet for a man who has spent his
presidency wagging his finger at the United States and railing against
its capitalist model. Cozying up to Russia, whose leaders have been
increasingly at odds with the United States, evoked cold war rivalries
in the hemisphere.
Mr. Chávez
has also used his oil money — in direct payments and through subsidized
oil shipments — to win friends in the hemisphere and elsewhere,
including President Evo Morales
of Bolivia, who expelled the United States ambassador in La Paz last
month, saying the envoy was involved in plotting a coup. There was
actual fighting in Bolivia among government and opposition forces. So
much so that the conservative Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints, which had more than 100 missionaries in Bolivia, quickly moved
them from harms way into Chile and Peru.
If
you ever want a bell weather of how politically stable a country is,
look to see if it has Mormon missionaries. If not, beware.
Domestic
spending in Venezuela has also surged, through the creation of a wide
array of social welfare programs that furthered Mr. Chávez’s goal of
building a socialist-inspired state — and suppressed opposition. The
2009 budget, based on $60-a-barrel oil, includes a 23 percent increase
in government spending, to $78.9 billion. Some of that amount accounted
for new job creation and hopes for a better economy.
At
$140 a barrel for oil, that was conservative. With prices now
uncomfortably close to $60 a barrel, economists in Venezuela are
expressing alarm over the government’s ability to pay its bills,
including those for arms purchases.
Venezuelans
are already struggling with an inflation rate of 36 percent, one of the
highest in the world. Thanks to Bush's conservative agenda, inflation
has been held to 2.36%--something we don't hear Democrats talk about
but with which Republicans should take comfort. That's
something Democrats and Republicans alike should be happy about along
with the security we enjoy in America. For that, thank the Bush
administration and its aggressive anti-terrorist campaign and the wars
in the Middle East. With the Democrats in power, expect an errosion of
that feeling of security, especially if Obama continues to court people
like Louis Farrakhan, William Ayers, Jeramiah Wright, and his commie
buddies that he says he would feel comfortable calling to the White
House for talks without preconditions. So
far we have not had another 9/11, but Joe Biden predicts if Obama is
elected within six months he will be confronted with a challenge of
leadership, something Bush has mastered. A similar challenge of
leadership is not predicted for John McCain because of his vast foreign
policy experience. Foreign nations will be less apt to "test" the tough
McCain than an inexperienced Obama.
Because
of this, if Obama is elected look for unstable times, both foreign and
domestic, and aggressive behavior by our adversaries that did not occur
with Bush but are likely with Obama. Employment worldwide thrives in
times other than those predicted for Obama.